Legislature(2011 - 2012)BARNES 124
02/02/2012 08:00 AM House COMMUNITY & REGIONAL AFFAIRS
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB170 | |
| HB290 | |
| HB184 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | HB 184 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 290 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 170 | TELECONFERENCED | |
HB 184-REFUND OF FISH BUSINESS TAX TO MUNIS
9:45:09 AM
CHAIR MUNOZ announced that the final order of business would be
HOUSE BILL NO. 184, "An Act relating to the sharing of tax
revenue from the fisheries business tax and fishery resource
landing tax with municipalities; and providing for an effective
date."
9:46:20 AM
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON, Alaska State Legislature, deferred to
Mr. Cottongim to explain the information he provided per
Representative Austerman's request.
9:47:02 AM
TIM COTTONGIM, Fish Group Manager, Juneau Office, Tax Division,
Department of Revenue, per the request of Representative
Austerman, provided the committee with a spreadsheet that breaks
out the impact of solely the export provision to each of the
communities previously receiving sharing from the fisheries
business tax. The export provision provides that revenues are
shared back to communities from where the fish was first landed,
prior to being exported from the state.
9:48:28 AM
REPRESENTATIVE AUSTERMAN remarked that this spreadsheet relates
the results of the 50:50 split versus the 75:25 split of the
community and the state. Currently, the fisheries landing tax
is split 50:50 between the communities and the state. If
another 25 percent is given to the municipalities, then that's
25 percent less that goes to the state. The aforementioned
would fuel the House Finance Committee argument that the
fisheries don't pay their way. If the legislation reaches the
House Finance Committee with the additional 25 percent of the
fisheries landing tax going to municipalities, it may be
something the House Finance Committee doesn't want to do. He
acknowledged that the sponsor has said she will withdraw the
legislation if the 25 percent increase to the municipalities
doesn't remain in the legislation. Still, Representative
Austerman opined that the legislation should be reviewed in
regard to how the distribution of taxes would flow from the
smaller communities to the larger communities based on not
having the 25 percent. The original legislation, prior to the
inclusion of the 25 percent increase, had problems that should
be reviewed.
9:50:41 AM
CHAIR MUNOZ pointed out that the legislation addresses two
taxes: the fisheries business tax and the fisheries resource
landing tax. The table prepared by Mr. Cottongim assumes that
one of the taxes was removed from the formula.
MR. COTTONGIM replied yes, the table doesn't address the piece
dealing with the exported unprocessed shares. Therefore, the
table didn't calculate the 75 percent at all, rather it took the
current 50 percent share that's in law and changed it based on
the exported unprocessed being shared directly by DOR instead of
it going to DCCED to allocate.
CHAIR MUNOZ related her understanding that if the legislation
moves forward as currently written and isn't changed to amend
either of the taxes, the return to the communities is much
greater. In fact, in most cases, there would be a substantial
increase in revenue.
MS. COTTONGIM replied yes, adding that he didn't believe any
community would experience a loss at the 75 percent share along
with this provision.
9:52:37 AM
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON reminded the committee that when the
state received 50 percent of the tax, the state owned the
harbors. However, now most of the harbors have been transferred
to local municipalities and haven't been given money to help
maintain the harbors. Although [the additional funds provided
via HB 184] won't address all the harbor needs, it will help.
If the legislation is changed, that is the taxes are decoupled,
she announced that she would withdraw the legislation.
9:53:54 AM
CHAIR MUNOZ announced that HB 184 would be held over.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| CSHB170-Sponsor Memo on changes Version I.pdf |
HCRA 2/2/2012 8:00:00 AM |
HB 170 |
| HB170 CS 27-LS05621I.pdf |
HCRA 2/2/2012 8:00:00 AM |
HB 170 |
| HB184 (H)CRA Amendment.pdf |
HCRA 2/2/2012 8:00:00 AM |
HB 184 |
| HB184 DOR Share Credit Analysis.pdf |
HCRA 2/2/2012 8:00:00 AM |
HB 184 |
| HB184 DOR Tax Div. Summary Definition.pdf |
HCRA 2/2/2012 8:00:00 AM |
HB 184 |
| HB184 City of Homer response to CRA question.msg |
HCRA 2/2/2012 8:00:00 AM |
HB 184 |
| HB184-DCCED-DCRA-01-26-12.pdf |
HCRA 2/2/2012 8:00:00 AM |
HB 184 |
| CSHB184 Ver R CRA.pdf |
HCRA 2/2/2012 8:00:00 AM |
HB 184 |
| HB184-DOR-TAX-01-25-12.pdf |
HCRA 2/2/2012 8:00:00 AM |
HB 184 |
| CSHB290 National Standards Compliance.pdf |
HCRA 2/2/2012 8:00:00 AM |
HB 290 |
| CSHB290 Version D.PDF |
HCRA 2/2/2012 8:00:00 AM |
HB 290 |
| HB290 Changes from Version B to Version D.pdf |
HCRA 2/2/2012 8:00:00 AM |
HB 290 |